Spouses Mariano v.

Abrajano & Bayauya

A.C. 12690 April 26, 2021
Perlas-Bernabe, J.:

FACTS:

Two of the petitioners are the spouses Mariano who filed a disbarment case
against the respondents, Atty. Roberto C. Abrajano, and Atty. Jorico F. Bayaua for the
alleged engaging in unlawful, dishonest, immoral, or deceitful conduct.

Complainants alleged that respondents were acting in conspiracy with each

other, committed deceitful and unlawful acts in the preparation and filing of the petition
for the declaration of nullity of marriage of the spouses George and Lany – they
intentionally indicated the wrong address of George and Lany, and fabricated stories so
the decision of the RTC would be favorable to them.

The report and recommendation of the IBP found that there was no conspiracy
between the respondents, but Atty. Bayaua violated Rule 7 of the Rules of Court, by
signing the pleadings that signified that he tolerated Atty. Abrajo’s commission of
unauthorized practice of law and therefore he also violated the Code of Professional
Responsibility. With these findings, the IBP recommended the suspension of Atty.
Bayaua in the law practice for six (6) months.

Atty. Bayaua filed a motion for reconsideration and IBP dismissed the case
because of lack of proof on the part of complainants.

Complainants moved for reconsideration but the same was denied by the IBP.

Aggrieved, complainants filed a petition for review on certiorari before the court.

ISSUE:

Whether or not respondents should be held administratively liable?

RULING OF THE SUPREME COURT:

Yes, respondents should be held administratively liable.

Atty. Bayaua himself admitted that he signed the succeeding pleadings and
therefore practically confirmed that he is petitioner’s counsel and not Atty. Abrajo. His
responsibility as such is thus governed by Section 3, Rule 7 of the 1997 Rules of Civil
Procedure. This violation is an act of falsehood before the courts, which in itself is a
ground for subjecting him to disciplinary action. Indubitably, there is substantial
evidence to hold Atty. Bayaua administratively liable.

FALLO:

The Court resolves to DISMISS the instant administrative complaint insofar as

respondent Atty. Roberto C. Abrajano is concerned in view of his supervening death.

On the other hand, the Court finds respondent Atty. Jorico F. Bayaua GUILTY of
violating Section 3, Rule 7 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure. He is hereby
REPRIMANDED and STERNLY WARNED that a repetition of the same or similar acts
will be dealt with more severely.